The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

5033899974_f2f95775cd_z

I recently came across an amusing subhead in a promotional flyer: “Learn from Incredible Speakers.” Then the piece promoting an all-day conference said, in smaller print, “Listen to expert speakers from around the country.” Ah, “expert.” Nice recovery, but, unfortunately, what you told me in bold print was that the speakers are not to be believed. And I need to pay to hear them?

This lapse in how to express that the speakers are really good prompted me to make a few unrelated observations about “good” and “bad.”

Doing “good”

In conversation, if we’re asked how a presentation was, we might favorably respond “Good!” or “Tremendous!” or even “Incredible!” and sell our commonplace answer with enthusiastic body language and inflection. But in writing, where our words are out there on their own and we want to strive for more freshness and precision, we can improve on our personal clichés by dipping into our synonym bank.

Think of all the choices we have when we want to emphasize “good”: “superb,” “fantastic,” “exceptional,” “remarkable,” “wonderful,” etc. And we can often call upon more exacting descriptive words: a “stunning photo exhibit,” an “agile mind,”  an “electrifying speaker.”

Other descriptors get into the why something is “terrific” or “extraordinary”: a “tireless volunteer,”  a “savvy consultant,” an “eye-opening lecture,” “ingenious choreography.”

We know that continually bulking up our vocabulary arms us with ever-increasing options in how we express ourselves, and there might not be an easier place to start than expanding all the ways we can say “good.”

“Good” vs. “well”

Two reminders about this adjective and the corresponding adverb:

1. Sometimes we hear or read misuses like these: He did good to break even. So far, she’s doing especially good in math. After the tuneup, the car ran good. Ouch. Ugly errors like those are bound to distract. Let’s go with the adverb, “well.” He did well. She’s doing especially well. The car ran well.

2. But remember that we can’t go wrong when referring to how one feels. I feel good. I feel well. She is good. She is well. Our grammar rules would seem to dictate that only “good” is correct, but when the context is health, “well” is correct too.

“Bad” vs. “badly”

Examples of the main trap regarding this pair are I feel badly for my neighbor or I feel badly about your loss. A few verbs like “is,” “are,” “were,” “seem,” “appear,” and “feel” are linking verbs. They don’t express action; they just … well, link. So saying or writing, I feel bad is correct because that’s like saying or writing I am bad or It seems bad. We’d never say or write I am badly or It seems badly. So let’s stay away from the ugly I feel badly.

Postscript: One of my early posts (http://www.normfriedman.com/blog/wp-admin/post.php?post=73&action=edit), focusing on the overuse of “very,” complements this post. You might want to check it out.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Common Grammar Errors, Flair & Finesse | Leave a comment

Stay on Track II

9552127269_68f75b7b75_z

Last week we looked at how frequently bullets are not composed in a parallel fashion and how easily we can fix that oversight. To review:

I hope to cover three items at Friday’s meeting:
• Setting a theme for our tribute event.
• Selecting a speaker from the “A list” we developed.
• Determination of an optimal date and back-up date.

So if we merely change “Determination” to “Determining,” we are staying on track, writing with more finesse, and giving our reader a smoother ride. Now let’s wrap up this topic by looking at the failure to use parallel construction within a single sentence.

From flawed to fixed

At the meeting please summarize recent annual tribute events, review the list of potential speakers we’ve generated and possible dates. (The parallelism breaks down because there is no verb for “possible dates.”) But, again, the repair job is easy.

Fix A: If the verb “review” is doing double-duty, we just need to delete the comma after “events” and insert “and.” At the meeting please summarize recent annual tribute events and review the list of potential speakers we’ve generated and possible dates.

Fix B: If “review” refers only to potential speakers, we need a verb to go with “possible dates.” At the meeting please summarize recent annual tribute events, review the list of potential speakers we’ve generated, and propose possible dates.

If we have just two elements, should they be parallel?

The answer is yes. We want to discuss presentation of a panel instead of an individual speaker and inviting Nancy Foster to act as moderator. Tsk, tsk. “Presentation” and “inviting” don’t agree. (Notice that despite the flaw this sentence is still clear, so the slip-up is not serious. In a more complicated sentence, however, lack of parallelism can mar more than elegance; it can hamper comprehension.)

Fix A: We want to discuss presentation of a panel instead of an individual speaker and an invitation to Nancy Foster to act as moderator.

Fix B: We want to discuss presenting a panel instead of an individual speaker and inviting Nancy Foster to act as moderator.

Ensuring parallel construction when we edit our work pays off in enhanced clarity and style.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Common Grammar Errors, Flair & Finesse | Leave a comment

Stay on Track

9552127269_68f75b7b75_z

In last week’s post, I highlighted an unusual number of flaws in just two sentences of an online article. One of those flaws, a breakdown in parallel construction, deserves more illumination because many of us found the topic tedious back in school, and now we wish we had been paying more attention. Here’s your chance to catch up on the importance of keeping your wording on track.

Exhibit A

Lack of parallel construction can be especially apparent in a bulleted list.

We need to take care of the following by Friday:
• Invite Jill to chair the task force.
• Select one person per department to serve with her.
• Establishment of date for first meeting. (Uh-oh. This construction doesn’t agree with the first two.)

But that inconsistency is simple to fix, right? Once our antennae become attuned to this common oversight in workplace writing, we can quickly do the repair work. In this case, we merely need to change “Establishment of” to “Establish.” Now all three bullets move along parallel tracks: Invite, Select, Establish. And we have other easy ways to accomplish the same end, such as starting each bullet with a noun or present participle (“-ing” verb).

We need to take care of the following by Friday:
• Invitation to Jill to chair the task force.
• Selection of one person per department to serve with her.
• Establishment of date for first meeting.

We need to take care of the following by Friday:
• Inviting Jill to chair the task force.
• Selecting one person per department to serve with her.
• Establishing the date for the first meeting.

Exhibit B

Another way to go off the rails when composing bullets is expressing some items as complete sentences and others as fragments.

Three statistics jumped out at me when I read the year-end report:
• Our fourth-quarter sales eclipsed third-quarter sales by 18 percent.
• The 14 percent rise from 2013 to 2014 in part-time help.
• Transportation costs were the lowest they’ve been since 2009.

See the problem? The middle bullet is not a complete sentence, but the other two are. This lapse can distract the reader, seem like an error, and even slow down reading speed and comprehension because the reader needs to keep switching gears.

Again, if we just keep our focus to make sure we don’t go off-track, the remedy is simple. Here is parallel construction by choosing to go with complete sentences.

Three statistics jumped out at me when I read the year-end report:
• Our fourth-quarter sales eclipsed third-quarter sales by 18 percent.
• Part-time help during the summer rose 14 percent from 2013 to 2014.
• Transportation costs were the lowest they’ve been since 2009.

And here is nearly identical content, but the style choice is sentence fragments.

Three statistics jumped out at me when I read the year-end report:
• The sales jump of 18 percent from third quarter to fourth quarter.
• The 14 percent rise in part-time help during the summer compared to 2013.
• The decrease in transportation costs to the lowest they’ve been since 2009.

Next week we’ll wrap up our review of parallel construction by illustrating lapses within individual sentences. Meanwhile, stay on track to enhance the elegance of your writing and give your readers a smooth ride.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Flair & Finesse | Leave a comment

An Embarrassment of Glitches

3591732069_a204239c0f_z

What a gold mine. A few days ago, a major online news outfit handed me a cornucopia of discussion topics in just two sentences: “In the past two weeks, overall arrests have fallen 66 percent compared to the same period last year. During that same time, traffic tickets and summons for minor offenses have fallen a whopping 94 percent year-over-year.”

Maybe you found more problems than I did, but here’s my hit list.

First sentence

Although “arrests have fallen” is not a serious error, we want “arrests fell.” “Have fallen” implies ongoing action, as in I have fallen on the ice twice this winter (and winter isn’t over, so I might slip again). But “in the past two weeks” gives a frame of reference that has ended, so “overall arrests fell” is right.

Lack of parallel structure can be hard to catch, but when we write “compared to” we know we need to make sure the comparative items are expressed similarly. Oops. “Overall arrests” is not parallel with “same period.”

So here are a couple of ways to rewrite the first sentence:
In the past two weeks, overall arrests fell 66 percent compared to arrests in the same period last year.
In the past two weeks, overall arrests totaled just 34 percent of arrests in the same period last year.

Second sentence

Comprehending statistics is hard enough without the ambiguous lead-in “During that same time.” What is meant by “same time”? The two-week period a year ago, the two weeks that just ended, or the one year we are using for comparison purposes? Let’s keep it simple and say nothing about time. We’ve already established our framework.

Then “year-over-year,” at the end of the sentence, restates what was intended by “During that same time,” so we have redundancy. And by the way (is your head pounding yet?), “year-over-year” shouldn’t be hyphenated when it comes after the thing it’s describing. When a phrase like that precedes what it’s describing (year-over-year comparisons), the hyphens are correct, but not when the phrase follows.

We also have “summons” as a plural, but it’s one summons and two summonses, right? True, we don’t have many pairings like lens and lenses, but because we’d say a summons, we should have a sixth sense that the plural is summonses.

And now, drum roll please, we have the fun finale: “a whopping 94 percent.” For this concluding complaint we quote Edwin Newman (1919–2010), the popular NBC reporter who wrote and spoke about proper use of our language and expressed many of his observations in the bestseller Strictly Speaking: Will America Be the Death of English. In his book Newman held up hackneyed phrases like “whopping wage increases” for scorn, asking, “When does a wage increase begin to whop?” Or, to magnify his point, if 94 percent is a dramatic statistic on its own, why do we need “whopping”?

Our second sentence, therefore, might read better like this:
Even more striking, traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses fell 94 percent.

Now let’s put all our refinements together:
In the past two weeks, overall arrests fell 66 percent compared to arrests in the same period last year. Even more striking, traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses fell 94 percent.

We all make mistakes when we write, but when we fail to put adequate effort into editing and proofing, the error count can become embarrassing.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Brevity, Common Grammar Errors, Flair & Finesse | Leave a comment

A Year-End Question

9287281160_d7905434c8_z

Which is correct: “New Year’s Eve” or “New Years Eve”? Do we need the apostrophe or should we leave it out? Or are they both correct? The answer is that we need it because we’re talking about the eve of the new year (just as “the book’s title” means “the title of the book”). So “New Year’s Eve” (with initial caps because it’s a holiday) is the way to go.

But that was only the warm-up. Now that we’ve dealt with the apostrophe in “New Year’s Eve,” what would you say is the most common apostrophe error the other 364 days? Ready? You don’t have to agree with me, but I’d vote for the mishandling of the apostrophe when dealing with names, particularly the illogical error of inserting an apostrophe when merely making a last name plural.

Let’s review. We make a last name like “Baker” plural the same way we make the word “baker” plural. Just add an “s.” There is no possession going on, so there is no call for an apostrophe. It will be fun to see the Bakers at the New Year’s Eve party.

And if the last name ends in an “s” or “z” sound, such as “Ross” or “Mendez,” we add an “e” and an “s,” creating another syllable, but there is still no reason to think about using an apostrophe. I’m looking forward to chatting with the Rosses and Mendezes at the New Year’s Eve party.

Easy. We just need to resist using an apostrophe when all we’re doing is making a last name plural.

So are we done?

That was the end of my quiz, but you may be uncertain about what to do when you are showing possession, so you’d normally add an apostrophe and an “s,” but the name already ends in “s.” You’ll be glad to know it’s hard to go wrong. Here are the situations.

First or last name, singular and possessive. Which ones are right?
I like Chris’s new haircut.
I like Chris’ new haircut.
Have you seen Lee Harris’s new car?

Have you seen Lee Harris’ new car?

They’re all correct. Just decide which style you like and stick with it. (And if you’re looking for guidance––thanks for asking––I prefer “Chris’s” and “Harris’s” because we are adding a syllable when we say it, so I like seeing it. But many writers and editors prefer omitting the extra “s,” probably because it looks clunky, especially after a double-“s”: Did you hear about Bess’s weekend?) So the choice is yours (Bess’s or Bess’).

That leaves us with a final situation: What do you do when you want to make a last name plural and possessive? The answer is logical. Just make the name plural and then add an apostrophe at the end, the same as you would with a word (the employees’ contracts; the bosses’ contracts). We played croquet on the Wilsons’ lawn. We played croquet on the Williamses’ lawn.

Happy new year.

Postscript: Yes, sadly, those welcome mats that say “The Foster’s” or “The Fullerton’s” are wrong, but at least the Fosters and Fullertons are friendly.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Common Punctuation Errors | Leave a comment

A Recommended “U-Turn”

4679757549_024867910d_z

A personalized license plate I spotted recently made me smile: MYWAY34. Apparently, this fellow feels pretty good about his uniquely independent spirit … and at least 33 other guys feel the same about theirs.

And what does this have to do with writing (and speaking)? The link is the word “unique” and the concept of oneness. Just as that driver might have gotten irritated one day when he encountered MYWAY19 parked at the local mall, many users of the English language get irritated when “unique” is handled poorly.

Two major reasons “unique” merits attention

The main reason to exercise caution around the word “unique” is the dreaded phrase “very unique.” To confer uniqueness on something is to use an absolute term, so “very unique” doesn’t make sense. Either something is one of a kind or it isn’t.

As a result, whenever we are about to use “very unique,” we should make a “u-turn” to another descriptor. If we’re writing, we have an abundance of choices (“outstanding,” “impressive,” “exemplary,” etc.). And if we’re speaking and in a pinch, a useful solution is “very unusual” (or just “unusual”). This phrasing, though not overly compelling, will keep that word nerd who was about to pounce on us at bay. Just make a u-turn.

Another reason to pause over “unique” in our writing is that we might be missing an opportunity to express ourselves more precisely. I interviewed a unique candidate yesterday. How so? Was she extremely well educated? Exceptionally personable? Eminently qualified but on probation for counterfeiting?

A minor reason

One more reason to be careful using “unique” is that we may be ascribing “uniqueness” to something that is clearly not one of a kind or is questionably one of a kind. Our customer service approach is unique in our industry. Really? Any chance you can substantiate that? (If you can, great. You should probably do it in the next sentence.)

Putting “unique” in perspective

So is “unique” a word to avoid because we have to give it extra thought? To the contrary. It is a powerful word because, when used judiciously, it enables us to make an absolute statement. We just need to consider the criteria for using “unique” effectively.

Postscript: Although we never want “very” in front of “unique,” an adverb we can use to advantage is “truly.” If we label something as “truly unique,” we’re implying that we’ve considered the qualities of uniqueness and we are being literal. This is a truly unique day in our organization’s history.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Flair & Finesse | Leave a comment

Eliminating Those Pesky “Ofs”

144288877_6155192a2c_z

Like an annoying mosquito or gnat spoiling an ideal summer evening, the word “of” often mars an otherwise perfect sentence. In fact, those erroneous “ofs” are so easy to miss, they crop up frequently in books, newspapers, and magazines––and certainly in our everyday speech. But if we commit to editing with a search-and-destroy approach, we can eliminate the unwanted “ofs” in our writing.

The three hiding places

The solution is simple. We just need to check whether the preposition “of” is needed after three other prepositions we use regularly: “inside,” “outside,” and “off.” Let’s illustrate.
Allie’s new home sits inside of the city limits.
Hallie likes having the coffee maker right outside
 of her office.
Sally has lived off of
 her pension for 20 years.

In how many of those sentences should we reach for the bug spray? Right! All of them. We really meant to write this:
Allie’s new home sits inside the city limits.
Hallie likes having the coffee maker right outside her office.
Sally has lived off her pension for 20 years.

The exceptions for idioms

So every time we spot “of” after “inside,” “outside,” or “off,” we should use the bug spray, correct? Sorry. Not so fast. We need to allow for the correct use of “inside of” as a figure of speech meaning “in less than” or “fewer than.”
If we don’t hit much more traffic, we’ll arrive inside of an hour. (Meaning “in less than.”)
She estimates that inside of 10 contracts won’t be renewed. (Meaning “fewer than.”)

And we need to allow for the correct use of  “outside of” meaning “except” or “except for.”
Everyone enjoyed the seminar outside of Eric. (Meaning “except.”)
Outside of regular maintenance, I had no car expenses this year. (Meaning “except for.”)

So there you have it. “Off of” would never be correct, but “inside of” and “outside of” are correct on occasion as figures of speech. Generally, however, “inside” and “outside” do not need a wingman. Now that you’re armed with understanding and bug spray, go get ’em.

Postscript. Scanning a list of prepositions, I identified one more––used far less often––that could be followed by a useless “of”: “opposite.” So instead of writing “opposite of the drug store,” we want to write “opposite the drug store.”

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Brevity, Common Grammar Errors, Flair & Finesse | Leave a comment

Putting Two School Rules in Context

2533394592_4afdcded39_z

If emancipation from two no-nos we had to heed in school will make your day, I’ll try. Let’s review.

The fragment

Back in fifth or seventh grade––and maybe high school––we weren’t allowed to write sentence fragments because our teachers needed to make sure we understood the difference between a complete sentence and an incomplete one. But with maturity come privileges. So if you have already recovered from the school days prohibition and are comfortably dropping in an occasional fragment for impact or rhythm, I applaud you. Anything to keep our readers engaged. (See, I just did it.)

But if you are still committed to showing your readers that you recognize when a sentence is complete, I applaud you too. You have standards. At the same time, however, I’ll suggest that you can expand your stylistic possibilities by seeing how it feels to throw in a fragment now and then (which you are probably doing already in bulleted lists that haven’t drawn any readers’ scorn).

Don’t you agree that the fragments ending these statements add punch?
If you give me all the information, I can get you a quote soon. Probably by Thursday.
I just figured out who’s replacing Sam. No one.
Please confine your summary to a page or less. Preferably, a lot less. 

Advertisers do it. Marketers do it. Journalists do it. Maybe it’s time for you to consider the power of fragments––sprinkled in judiciously, of course, for the right reader in the right situation. (And watch out for mixing full sentences and fragments in those bulleted lists. That makes the rhythm discordant and distracting.)

The one-sentence paragraph

Most of us are quite comfortable writing paragraphs containing just one sentence in emails and texts, but we might shy away from that practice in letters, memos, reports, proposals, or any other document that seems more formal.

Why? Again, the reason for toeing the line is conditioning we acquired in school that was important then and not important now. Teachers might have justifiably barred one-sentence paragraphs when they were looking for us to support our point of view, such as on a theme or essay exam. (And they might have been aiming objections at the kids who were unconfident about knowing when to start a new paragraph and solved the problem by starting one after every sentence.)

But we know that one-sentence paragraphs sell products (“Just do it.”), and they can help us sell ideas. An isolated, persuasive sentence, such as this one, commands attention:

I enthusiastically recommend spicing up your writing with occasional one-sentence paragraphs.

School is out! Live it up.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Flair & Finesse, Tone | Leave a comment

Quotation Marks: Inside or Outside? Part II

Quote marksIn the last post I tried to reinforce an absolute rule for “American English”: The two most common punctuation marks, periods and commas, ALWAYS GO INSIDE quotation marks, despite our logic telling us otherwise. (“American English” because the rule is different in the UK and some parts of Canada.) Now what about question marks, exclamation points, colons, and semicolons? Here you go.

We have to think about it

Question marks can go inside or outside quotation marks, depending on the relationship of the punctuation mark to the section in quotes. Trust your logic.

Janie asked, “How old do you think Uncle Bert is?” Logical, right? Janie posed a question, so the question mark indicates that, and then we end the quote with quotation marks.

Did you really call Uncle Bert a “geezer”? Logical again. It makes sense to enclose “geezer” in quotes and then punctuate the sentence correctly––with a question mark.

Exclamation points can go inside or outside as well, for the same reasons.

The shortstop yelled, “Got it!”

Stop calling me a “doofus”!

Don’t even think about it

As with periods and commas, where we can go on autopilot, semicolons and colons are similar––but in the opposite direction. They ALWAYS GO OUTSIDE the quotation marks (which is logical).

She called her absence a “personal day”; I guess to her the World Series is personal. 

Four of our culinary students are competing in the “Souper Bowl”: Kelly, Hannah, Mo, and John.

So we have six punctuation marks to worry about, and here are the rules one more time:

Periods and commas always go inside quotation marks. Don’t apply logic.

Question marks and exclamation points can go inside or outside based on what’s happening in the sentence.

Semicolons and colons always go outside the quotation marks because we can’t come up with a situation where the opposite would be logical.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Common Punctuation Errors | Leave a comment

Quotation Marks: Inside or Outside? (Part I)

Quote marks

For a short workweek, let’s clear up an area of punctuation confusion we can cover in a short post––but there’s a catch. This punctuation rule can be counterintuitive. But wait. If you can sweep away the counterintuitive part, you’ll never have to think about this issue again. So fasten your seatbelt for a fast, bumpy ride.

Yes, always

Periods and commas always go inside quotation marks. That’s it.

(Well, that’s not all there is to it if you regularly correspond with folks in the UK or some parts of Canada because the rule is different there, but here in the US the rule is absolute.) So let’s examine the various situations.

“I’m looking for a used car,” Sammy said. Easy. The comma after a direct quotation goes inside because that looks right and conforms with the rule we remember from elementary school.

Sammy said, “I’m looking for a used car.” Same deal with the period in a quotation. Easy.

If you didn’t understand why Sally called your idea “old-fashioned,” you should have asked her. Hmm. This rule, for quotation marks being used for a different reason, is harder to remember. Shouldn’t we finish putting quotation marks around “old-fashioned” and then drop in the comma? No. Don’t get confused by logic. It’s a rule! Put the comma inside, and you’re right every time.

I don’t get why Sally called your idea “old-fashioned.” Again, we have to fight off logic and make the correct move: period then quotation mark.

For next time

So are the rules governing the order of quotation marks with other punctuation, such as exclamation points and semicolons, just as simple? Sorry. In some of those situations we do have to think for a few seconds, but the rules are easy because they’re logical. We’ll cover those in my next post.

For now, if you never had the rule about periods and commas locked in, enjoy your new understanding––and be thankful for all the time you’re going to save by applying this absolute rule: Periods and commas always go inside quotation marks.

In addition to presenting workshops on writing in the workplace, Norm Friedman is a writer, editor, and writing coach. His 100+ Instant Writing Tips is a brief “non-textbook” to help individuals overcome common writing errors and write with more finesse and impact. Learn more at http://www.normfriedman.com/index.shtml.

Posted in Common Punctuation Errors | Leave a comment